DOCSLIB.ORG

A Layer Monument Locally Called ‘El Oalch’ Meaning the Fortress Is Found at El Fayum

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Layer Monument Locally Called ‘El Oalch’ Meaning the Fortress Is Found at El Fayum SEILA A layer monument locally called ‘el OalCh’ meaning the fortress is found at el Fayum. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE MONUMENT SEILA1 Construction The results of my investigation show that the layer monument of Seila was completely built in the reign of king Snfrw the first king of the 4th dynasty. Subsequently he built 3 pyramids with 2 subsidiaries. These buildings demonstrate a marked development in the history of pyramid construction. It is obvious that this layer monument, because of its striking similarity to step pyramids of his predecessors of the 3rd dynasty, became the last to built in their tradition and his last monument, the Red pyramid at Dahshur became the example followed by his successors of the Old and Middle Kingdoms. The discovery of a pavement, cult chapels and outer facing blocks indicate that the layer monument was completed, preserved and maintained during the 4th dynasty and with the coming of the 5th dynasty violation and destruction began.2 Ancient times During the late Old Kingdom and the First Intermediate Period, the upper part of the nucleus was exposed by the removal of the upper courses of the facing. The lower courses over a pavement were left undamaged. Subsequently the monument was left undisturbed for a considerable period, which goes much later than the Middle Kingdom. Meanwhile the exposed nucleus was subjected to weather erosion.3 Falling limestone spalls accumulated creating a thick homogeneous layer on the pavement. These spalls covered the remaining undamaged blocks of the outer facing, figure 18/4.4 1 Dr. Edwards had visited the site during my second season, and attended my lectures concerning this excavation at Oxford on June 7 1988 and at the Fifth Congress of Egyptologists in Cairo. It surprises me to see that he has ignored my role at Seila in his Pyramids editions, which follow that date. See however. Edwards I.E.S, The pyramid of Seila and its place in the succession of Snofru's pyramids, Fs C. Aldred, 1996, 88; ….. Studies in honour of A.F.Shore, 1994. 2 This occurred at earlier sacred precincts such as building the pyramid of Userkaf between the dry moat and the temenos of the Step Pyramid; tunnelling the rock tombs of Chantier H in the rock knoll of the Brick Pyramid at Abu Rawash; tunnelling the quarry cemetery west of the pyramid of Khafra; and other examples. 3 Today spalls continue falling. 4This assumption is based on a cord basket and a wooden box with a sliding lid, figures */8 and */8 which were found in this layer of spalls. The latter can be dated to the Middle Kingdom. Spalls Later during the New Kingdom or the Second Intermediate Period all the undamaged facing blocks were dug out to the foundation level. As seen in that figure 18/4 and 6/3 below, a gap was created between the accumulated spalls on the pavement outside and the backing blocks on the inside. It has been suggested by Lesko that blocks from the layer monument were reused at the early Christian cemetery of Fag El Gamous.5 During the Late Period, further destruction of the nucleus took place. The gap mentioned was filled up with rubble. This rubble over flew completely covering the spalls. The present appearance of the monument began to take shape from there on. See figures: (76, 77, 86, 88)/5 below. 5 The dates of this phase of destruction and the cemetery do not match moreover for its supplies; local quarries are closer to the cemetery. The east side: the pavement was covered with spalls leaning on the outer facing; and by the removal of that outer facing the backing blocks were exposed; and a gap was created between them. This gap was filled up with rubble. The 19th centaury The layer monument was locally known as ‘el Oalah’ meaning the fortress, Petrie thought it was a mastaba but it acquired the name “Pyramid of Seila” after L. Borchardt made a visit to the site in 1898 and published his short article in 1900.6 The first published material however came 10 years earlier where Petrie is quoted:7 “The Mastaba is a landmark of all this part of the country; and can be seen from Hawara, as a heap on the hill top. It is formed of rough stone blocks laid with desert clay. It was built cumulatively, with successive finished faces (layers), but not finely coated with casing on each. It is about 90 feet square and 25 feet high. A great gash has been cut into it in a murderous fashion on the North side; in the same way that the pyramids of Dahshur, Kula, and others have been barbarously mangled of late years. Nothing appears to have been found here, the middle being cleared down to three feet below the pavement level. This is probably a building of the Xllth Dynasty; but who lay beneath it we shall hardly find until it is properly explored. The wild hill on which this stands has been trenched in all directions by rain fall, and rises into sharp crests too narrow to stand on, along the top sloping down to Medum on one hand and falling in cliffs down into the Fayum on the other. At the west foot of it is a village perhaps of Cufic date.” Petrie's remarks accurately describe the site, the monument and the robber's trench. Undoubtedly he did not notice that layer 3 on the west side had been removed.8 Physically by that removal the monument acquired a more rectangular plan ; consequently he describes and marks it as a mastaba; see his sketch map; reproduced here in figure 4/2A. I wondered if he made further investigations without publishing them. Consequently in London on June 18, 1988, I contacted Ms. Margaret Drawer who is most familiar 6 Borchardt L.,, Die pyramide von Silah auszug aus einem berichte, ASAE I, 211-214., Cairo 1900. he mentions noticing a piece of basalt which may come from a chapel or ststue 7 Petrie W M F, Illahun, Kahun and Gurob 1891 (Surrey 1974) 31 and plate XXX. 8 I estimate that it was a major task, lasting one month with at least 50 workers. with his work and, who, in 1985, had published. Flinders Petrie, a life in Archaeology. I learnt that he did not. The pit was dug in the core and a trench was forced to the north destroying layers 1, 2, and 3. It will be referred to as 'the robber's trench and pit'. This destructive investigation is similar to Raymond Weill's at Hebenu later in 1912.9 The rubble dump resulting on the north side created a large mound similar to the one of K1 at Bet Khallaf. One wonders if these excavations were made by Mariette or a team of scholars led by Maspero.10 Before 1981 A. Pochan, published another short article with 5 photographs in 1938.11 In 1951 Ahmed Fakhry considered investigating this layer monument, but declined for a greater project at the Bent pyramid.12 In 1962 J-Ph. Lauer gave an account of the layer monument13 his measurments have proved to be fairly accurate. The base length of 60 cubits, an orientation west of north, a layer width of 5 cubits, a possibility of an outer facing, a side angle of 14º and a possibility of a date contemporary to the pyramid of Meidum. He states that the monument was more important than the other three known at the time of the publication, Hebenu, Nubt and el Kula.14 He considered Seila to have 4 steps, with a height of 40 cubits and made a drawing reproduced in figure 6/6A. Lauer suggests the monument to belong to king Huni or to queen Hetep Heres the wife of Snfrw. In April 1979 W. Kaiser and G. Dreyer15 made their famous visit to all the layer monuments and recorded some observations. Concerning Seila the base length on the west side 22.5 meters, an orientation 12º west of north, width of the outer layer on the south side 5 cubits, side angles 12º-13º on the north side, 14º on the west side, 15º on the east side, and 13.5º, 14º-15º at the inner south layers.. The courses of masonry were laid in headers and stretchers having a height of 0.3-0.4 meters and inclined backwards. The mortar was a mixture of sand and clay. 1981 Leonard Lesko conducted a short season at the layer monument of Seila in 1981 and published his results in JARCE 1988 after I had completed my two seasons. He kindly sent me an off print later on in that year. In addition to the points on the history of the layer monument mentioned, Lesko accounts for a former USA ambassador would have liked to see the pyramid of Seila excavated.16 The results of Lesko were a great help which are summarized as follows: 17 9 Weill R., CRAIBL, (1912) p, 484-490 (Zewiyet El Meyiteen). 10 Capart J. (Editor), Travels in Egypt, December 1880 to May 1891 Letters of Charles Edwin Wilbur, Brooklyn Museum (1936) 242-243. A black folder of cigarette paper with a red ribbon was found in the pit, figure */8. 11 Pochan A, Pyramide de Seila (au Fayoum) BIFAO XXXVII 1938, 161. 12 Fakhry A., The Monuments of Sneferu at Dahshur I The Bent Pyramid, Cairo 1959 * 13 Lauer J-Ph., Histoire monumentale des pyramides D'Égypte, Cairo 1962, 222-225, Fig 61and plate LXIX lower photograph; Les petites pyramids a degres de la IIIe Dynastie Revue Archaeologique 1961 II 5-15.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Astronomy, Topography and Dynastic History in the Age of the Pyramids
    Astronomy, topography and dynastic history in the Age of the Pyramids. Giulio Magli Faculty of Civil Architecture - Politecnico di Milano Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milan, Italy It is known since the 19 century that in the layout of the pyramid field of the pharaohs of the 4 th Egyptian dynasty at Giza, a “main axis” exists. Indeed, the south-east corners of these monuments align towards the site of the temple of Heliopolis, which was plainly visible in ancient times. It was later discovered that a similar situation occurs in the main pyramid field of the subsequent dynasty at Abu Sir. Here, the north-west corners of three chronologically successive pyramids again voluntarily align towards Heliopolis. However, the temple was in this case not visible, due to the rock outcrop- today occupied by the Cairo citadel - which blocks the view. In the present paper, a multi-disciplinary approach based on historical, topographical and archaeoastronomical analysis is developed in an attempt at understanding this peculiar feature, which governed from the very beginning the planning of such wonderful monuments. A general pattern actually arises, which appears to have inspired the choice of the sites and the disposition on the ground of almost all the funerary complexes of the kings during the Old Kingdom. 1. Introduction An interesting feature exists in the layouts of the pyramids of Giza and Abu Sir: the presence of a “main axis” directed to the area where the ancient temple of the sun of Heliopolis once stood, on the opposite bank of the Nile. These axes are connected with a process of “solarisation” of the pharaoh which probably started with Khufu, the builder of the Great Pyramid.
    [Show full text]
  • Geometry and Perspective in the Landscape of the Saqqara Pyramids
    GEOMETRY AND PERSPECTIVE IN THE LANDSCAPE OF THE SAQQARA PYRAMIDS MAGLI Giulio, (I) Abstract. A series of peculiar, visual alignments between the pyramids of the pharaohs of the 4th , the 5th and the 6th Egyptian dynasties exists. These alignments governed from the very beginning the planning of the funerary monuments of successive kings and, in some cases, led to establish building sites in quite inconvenient locations from the technical viewpoint. Explaining the topography of these monuments means therefore also investigating on their symbolic motivations: religion, power, dynastic lineage and social context, as well as getting insights on the skills of the ancient architects in astronomy and geometry. In the present paper we focus on the relationships between the Old Kingdom pyramids at Saqqara. Key words. Ancient astronomy. Ancient and sacred geometry. Egyptian pyramids. Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary 01A16, 51-03. 1 Introduction th It is known since the 19 century that an interesting feature exists in the layouts of the pyramids of th the 4 dynasty at Giza: the presence of a “main axis” connecting the south-east corners of the three main monuments and directed to the area where the ancient temple of the sun of Heliopolis once stood, on the opposite bank of the Nile [1,2,3]. This line is connected with a process of “solarisation” of the pharaohs which started with Khufu, the builder of the Great Pyramid, and th lasted up Menkaure, the builder of the third Giza pyramid [4,5]. The kings of the 5 dynasty moved - in spite of the presence of several favorable places to the immediate south of Giza - some 7 Kms apart on the plateau of Abusir.
    [Show full text]
  • Palarch's Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology 7(6), 2010
    Miatello, Khufu’s Grand Gallery PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 7(6) (2010) Examining thE grand gallEry in thE Pyramid of Khufu and its fEaturEs Luca Miatello* *Via garibaldi 18 22070 albiolo, Co, italy [email protected] Miatello, Luca. 2010. Examining the grand gallery in the Pyramid of Khufu and its features. – Palarch’s Journal of archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology 7(6) (2010), 1-36. issn 1567-214x. 36 pages + 14 figures, 3 tables (incl.a ppendix). Keywords: old Kingdom architecture, royal funerary complexes, pyramid of Khufu, grand gallery, architecture and decoration programme AbstrAct the explanation of the symmetrical features on the west and east sides of the grand gal- lery in the pyramid of Khufu has always been an intricate puzzle for researchers. the existence of such peculiar features is generally related to the function of parking the granite plugs, but only three or four granite blocks were presumably used to plug the ascending corridor, while a much larger number of slots and niches are found in the gal- lery. Previous interpretations of niches, slots, cuttings and grooves are unsatisfactory, and the present investigation focuses on important, formerly neglected aspects. the analysis of numerical patterns in the design of the grand gallery provides crucial evidence, and a new interpretation of the features in the gallery is, therefore, proposed, by considering the numerous variables implied in the problem. the grand gallery in the pyramid of Khufu, still today block the ascending corridor. how- with its astonishing corbelled ceiling made of ever, previous interpretations of the functions huge limestone blocks, has no parallel in in- of the peculiar features on the west and east ternal passages of pyramid tombs.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dry Moat Surrounding the Step Pyramid Complex
    THE DRY MOAT SURROUNDING THE STEP PYRAMID COMPLEX AT SAQQARA THE GREAT RECTANGULAR MONUMENTS OF MIDDLE SAQQARA THE STEP PYRAMID COMPLEX WAS BUILT BY IMHOTEP AND WAS RESTORED BY JEAN-PHILIPPE LAUER THE RECTANGULAR MONUMENTS AT ABYDOS WERE SURROUNDED BY DOUBLE WALLS OR TOMBS OF COURTIERS TOMBS OF COURTIERS ALSO SURROUNDED THE ROYAL TOMBS AT ABYDOS *** THE TOMB OF DEN THE GREAT RECTANGULAR MONUMENTS AT MIDDLE SAQQARA ARE NOT SURROUNDED BY EITHER DOUBLE WALLS OR TOMBS OF COURTIERS THE DISCOVERY OF THE DRY MOAT WITH THE HELP OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF 1924 AND 1950 THE DISCOVERY WAS ANNOUNCED AT THE 4TH CONGRESS OF EGYPTOLOGISTS MUNICH 1985 AND PUBLISHED LONDON 1988 AND VIENNA 2006 THE PLAN OF THE DRY MOAT SHOWS CHANNELS WHICH OVERLAP ON THE SOUTH SIDE THE HIEROGLYPHS BATTLMENTED ENCLOSURE, REED SHELTER IN THE FIELDS AND ON NARMER’S MACE HEAD; THE ENCLOSURE HAS OVERLAPPING WALLS GUNTER DREYER DISCOVERED THAT AT THE ROYAL TOMBS OF ABYDOS AN EMBANKMENT WALL WHICH SURROUNDED THE LOWER TUMULUS WAS OVERLAPPING ON ONE SIDE THE SOUTHERN OVERLAPING WALLS AT GISR EL MODIR THE ELBOW IN THE SOUTH TEMENOS WALL OF THE PYRAMID OF KHAFRA TO APPROACH THE DRY MOAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THE ROYAL TOMBS OF THE SECOND DYNASTY, THE PYRAMID OF UNAS, ITS CAUSEWAY AND BOAT PITS THE POSITION OF THE PYRAMID OF UNAS AT MIDDLE SAQQARA THE PYRAMID OF UNAS WAS BUILT OVER AN UNEXCAVATED PIT AND THE GALLERIES OF HOTEPSEKHEMWY THE UNEXCAVATED PIT EXTENDING UNDER THE PYRAMID OF UNAS THE PYRAMID OF UNAS AND THE UPPER TEMPLE OVER THE TOMB OF HOTEPSEKHEMWY THE LAYOUT OF THE ROYAL
    [Show full text]
  • Tessa Dickinson a Landscape and Materials-Based Approach to Royal Mortuary Architecture in Early Third Millennium BC Egypt Volum
    Tessa Dickinson A Landscape and Materials-based Approach to Royal Mortuary Architecture in Early Third Millennium BC Egypt Volume 1: Text Institute of Archaeology University College London 2014 Thesis submitted to University College London for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 1 Disclaimer I, Tessa Dickinson, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Tessa Dickinson 2 Abstract This dissertation examines the role that the building of royal mortuary complexes (RMC hereafter) played in the consolidation of the Egyptian state between the reigns of kings Khasekhemwy and Shepseskaf, c. 2,700-2,500 BC. The theoretical basis for this research is inspired by cross-cultural studies that demonstrate (a) that monuments are not only the after-effect of a centralised state system, but may themselves be integrative strategies that contribute more directly to a state’s formation and consolidation and (b) that a monument’s location and construction materials reflect both logistical and symbolic concerns with salient socio-political scope. The main analysis offered here consists of a sequential, monument-by-monument archaeological assessment of RMC location and construction materials with a particular emphasis on the role of a specialist workforce. This research combines both quantitative and qualitative methods that help flesh out possible logistical and symbolic implications associated with the decision- making process behind each RMC. The working and symbolic properties of a whole range of construction materials is determined via careful use of the limited contemporary, and more abundant later, Egyptian documentary sources, as well as demonstrable patterns of material use in the archaeological record.
    [Show full text]
  • Ägyptisches Museum, Berlin
    1 Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum Past and present members of the staff of the Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Statues, Reliefs and Paintings, especially R. L. B. Moss, E. W. Burney and Jaromir Malek, have taken part in the preparation of this list at the Griffith Institute, University of Oxford This pdf version (situation on 17 January 2012): Elizabeth Fleming, Alison Hobby and Diana Magee (Assistants to the Editor) and Tracy Walker Thebes. TT 1. Sennedjem. Dyn. XIX. i2.5 Outer coffin of woman, Tamakhet, in Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum, 10832. Aeg. Inschr. ii, 323-9; Ausf. Verz. 174. Thebes. TT 1. Sennedjem. Dyn. XIX. i2.5 Inner coffin lid of Tamakhet, in Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum, 10859. Alterthümer pl. 28; Ausf. Verz. 174-5. Thebes. TT 1. Sennedjem. Dyn. XIX. i2.5 Box of son, Ramosi, in Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum, 10195. Kaiser, Äg. Mus. Berlin (1967), Abb. 582; Aeg. Inschr. ii, 274; Ausf. Verz. 197. Thebes. TT 2. Khabekhnet. i2.7 Relief, Kings, etc., in Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum, 1625. L. D. ii. 20; Aeg. Inschr. ii, 190-2; Ausf. Verz. 155-6. <<>> Thebes. TT 23. Thay. i2.40(31)-(32) Relief, deceased with Western goddess, in Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum, 14220 (lost). Scharff, Götter Aegpytens, pl. 32; Aeg. Inschr. ii, 218; Ausf. Verz. 148. Thebes. TT 34. Mentuemhet. i2.61 Statue-group of three ape-guardians, dedicated by deceased, formerly in Bissing colln., then in The Hague, Scheurleer Museum, now in Berlin, Ägyptisches Museum, 23729. Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Statues, Reliefs and Paintings Griffith Institute, Sackler Library, 1 St John Street, Oxford OX1 2LG, United Kingdom [email protected] 2 Ä.Z.
    [Show full text]
  • Cults of the God Amun at Memphis: Identification, Prosopography and Toponymy
    CULTS OF THE GOD AMUN AT MEMPHIS: IDENTIFICATION, PROSOPOGRAPHY AND TOPONYMY Mariam Victoria Kamish submitted for the degree of PhD in archaeology University College London 1990 CULTS OF AMUN AT MEMPHIS for Fessar and Zena* *io alphabetical order AL-HORBAN \ \ \ \ 330Sooc- AL-MIDiYAH AL-QUSURAH \ \ TUMAN DAFBABY KHAUQ AR-RAML h BEWAL-BELADON N Birkah NAWA MlT RAHtNAH 330tooo- BAHR AL-QANTARAH ARBAIN FAKHRY S Birkah h \ ALJ QALAAH N3303ooo Memphis HELUL Hod and tom names and boundaries •dent of ruin field boundary M m PTAH ENCLOSURE VWALL 300m SABAKHAH EES grid I b - as published in Jeffreys, Survey o f MmpA/s. 2 Abstract Some fifteen cults of AmOn/Amon-R 6r are attested for Memphis, from the firs t attestations in the reign of Amenhotep II. They are AmOn/Amon-R£r of Prw-nfr/o; ob nswt t& j; of 'Inbw-Mo; pntj bvt Mrw, o\ *pit-nfr/c;<A Uwdntjt ;of N§i;<A 7pt; t/p w tn trn p w t raw n Wsr-m/rt-Rr-stp-n-Rr m pr 7mn,ol Rsbd;ot rbw,ot PJ-v-ro ;ti Pr-bnwM DnlR; and at Msdo, as this place may have been in the memphite region. Most of these cults appear to have been founded during the reign of Ramesses II, in line with a policy of malting manifest the principal deities in all their aspects and therefore in each of the major cities. Most of the temple foundations examined here were of middling size and were located in the area of central Memphis.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Egypt: an Introduction Salima Ikram Frontmatter More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-67598-7 - Ancient Egypt: An Introduction Salima Ikram Frontmatter More information Ancient Egypt An Introduction This book provides an introduction to one of the greatest civilisations of all time – ancient Egypt. Beginning with a geographical overview that explains the development of Egyptian belief systems as well as Egypt’s subsequent political development, the book examines Egyptological methodology; the history of the discipline of Egyptology; and Egyptian religion, social organization, urban and rural life, and funerary beliefs. It also discusses how people of all ranks lived in ancient Egypt. Lavishly illustrated, with many photographs of rarely seen sites, this volume is suit- able for use in introductory-level courses on ancient Egypt. It offers a variety of student-friendly features, including a glossary, a bibliography, and a list of sources for those who wish to pursue their interest in ancient Egypt. Salima Ikram is professor of Egyptology at the American University in Cairo. An archaeologist of ancient Egypt, she is the author of several scholarly and popular books, including, most recently, Death and Burial in Ancient Egypt, Divine Creatures: Animal Mummies in Ancient Egyp t, and, with A. M. Dodson, The Tomb in Ancient Egypt and The Mummy in Ancient Egypt. © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-67598-7 - Ancient Egypt: An Introduction Salima Ikram Frontmatter More information Agricultural and taxation scenes from the tomb
    [Show full text]
  • Texts from the Pyramid Age Frontstrud.Qxd 8/8/2005 4:25 PM Page Ii
    frontStrud.qxd 8/8/2005 4:25 PM Page i Texts from the Pyramid Age frontStrud.qxd 8/8/2005 4:25 PM Page ii Society of Biblical Literature Writings from the Ancient World Theodore J. Lewis, General Editor Associate Editors Edward Bleiberg Billie Jean Collins F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp Edward L. Greenstein Jo Ann Hackett Ronald J. Leprohon Niek Veldhuis Raymond Westbrook Number 16 Texts from the Pyramid Age by Nigel C. Strudwick Edited by Ronald J. Leprohon frontStrud.qxd 8/8/2005 4:25 PM Page iii Texts from the Pyramid Age by Nigel C. Strudwick Edited by Ronald J. Leprohon Society of Biblical Literature Atlanta frontStrud.qxd 8/8/2005 4:25 PM Page iv TEXTS FROM THE PYRAMID AGE Copyright © 2005 Society of Biblical Literature All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the pub- lisher. Requests for permission should be addressed in writing to the Rights and Permissions Office, Society of Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Atlanta, GA 30329 USA. The Semitica transliteration font used in this work is available from Linguist Software (www.linguist software.com), 425-775-1130. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Strudwick, Nigel. Texts from the pyramid age / by Nigel C. Strudwick. p. cm. — (Writings from the ancient world ; no. 16) Includes bibliographical references and index.
    [Show full text]
  • The Layer Monuments
    THE LAYER MONUMENTS Six layer monuments namely Hebenu, Sinki, Nubt, el Kula, el Ghenimiya and Elephantine (see entries) were built by a king or kings unknown to us and serve a purpose which is hitherto unclear. The investigations concerning them are incomplete, but some light however has been cast: they are almost of the same construction, dimensions, and seem to date to the 3rd dynasty; they have no substructures nor temples and are not within a cemetery of that period. To the 6 layer monuments some monuments could be added or related: Two pairs of tumuli at Naqada, investigated by Petrie. A square structure of rough masonry truly oriented to the cardinal points, of a side measurement of 11 m, suggest that it was a core of an unfinished or destroyed layer monument. It was excavated under the Middle Kingdom chapel of Ay at Abydos by C.T. Currelly. A benben named Seketra, and perhaps a pyramid named Nefer, recorded in ink on stone vessels discovered under the step pyramid at Saqqara. The pyramid of Snofru at Seila (see entry). Two step pyramids of queens of Menkaura at Giza (# G3b and G3c), differ in structure and function. Two benbens dating to the 5th dynasty in the sun temples of Userkaf at Abu Sir and Neuserra at Abu Ghurab. Four 5th dynasty benbens of other kings known from texts. With the exception of Ghenimiya which has never been excavated the other 5 layer monuments and Seila have only been partly investigated. The nuclei of Hebenu, Sinki and Nubt were built of quarried limestone and selected concretions from the slopes of the nearby plateau, Seila and el Kula were built of quarried limestone, el Ghenimiya was built of quarried sandstone and Elephantine was built of quarried granite and selected bolder.
    [Show full text]
  • The Place Where Huni Probably Buried Bohai,Xu
    The Place where Huni probably Buried Bohai,Xu Address: Suzhou Industrial Park, Suzhou, China Abstract: From the paper , we can speculate that Huni is exactly 吴回 (wuhui). Besides, the pronunciation of Huni resembles 吴回(wuhui). From the paper I speculate that the eagle in the statue unearthed in Taibo's tomb and the eagle in a statue of a man, dating from the State of Yue era, the eagles in the two statues resemble the God Horus in Egypt, so I can also get a conclusion that Wuxi(无锡) and Zhejiang(浙江) was once Egypt’s colony. I can also get a conclusion that Zhangshan Hill(嶂 山)means Egypt governor or pharaoh had come to Wuxi. Besides, we can get a conclusion that Chanshan Hill(产山)is a man-made pyramid, and Heliekou(河埒口)means enclosure around the man-made pyramid- Chanshan Hill, this pyramid complex looks like Djoser's Pyramid Complex which has enclosure around it. From the paper, we can conclude that Huishan clay figurines（惠山泥人）are ushabtis with Chinese characteristic, it indicates that Wuxi（无锡）was the colony of ancient Egypt. So Wuxi（无锡）means binding spot, Mount Xi（锡山） means a binding hill. And the ruins of Mount Xi(锡山) resemble "Pyramid of Khufu" in Giza pyramid complex. So we can get a hypothesis that Mount Xi(锡山) is a man-made pyramid. Furthermore, Wuxi （无锡）is the cradle of Chinese Wu culture（吴 文化）, I think this is owing to Huni. So from the above, we can speculate that Huni probably buried in Mount Xi , Wuxi(无锡锡山).
    [Show full text]
  • Contents Preface 2 Introduction 3 1. Why the New Concept of World History Is Needed? 3 2
    Contents Preface 2 Introduction 3 1. Why the new concept of world history is needed? 3 2. Base, axis and top of the social pyramid. 4 3. Why the history of civilization? 4 4. The problem of formations 7 5. The begin of civilization, its chronology and periodization; the time difference between Old and New World 9 6. Is civilization inevitable? What is history- progress or regress? 13 7. Civilization and pre-civilization 15 a) "Pre-civilization" in Egypt 15 b) "Pre-civilization" on the Near East 17 c) "Pre-civilization" in Mesoamerica 21 d) "Pre-civilizations“ of Southern America and the "Inca empire" 22 Early archaic (proto-antiquity) 30 I period (Old World-3050-2800 BCE, New World-50 BCE-200 CE) 30 8. Mythical and real history of Egypt in Early Kingdom 30 9. Protoliterary period in Sumer 36 10. Elam in the end of the IV- begin of III mill. BCE 40 11. Protoindian civilization 41 12. Maya and civilization of Teotihuakan in I period 43 Consclusion to the I period 45 II period (Old World-2800-2550 BCE, New World-200-450) 48 13. Egypt in the time of III and IV dynasties (2778-2563 BCE). 48 14. Sumer and Elam on the I and II stage of Early Dynastic period (2750-2500) 53 15. Maya and Teotihuakan in 200-450 CE. 56 Conclusion to the II period. 57 III period of early archaic (Old World-2550-2300 BCE, New World-450-700 CE) 59 16. Egypt in the time of V-VI dynasties (2563-2263 гг.
    [Show full text]